Case docket
Benworth Capital Partners, LLC v. Oto Analytics, LLC — N.D. Cal. No. 3:24-cv-04840
Benworth Capital Partners, LLC v. Oto Analytics, LLC — 2 court filings in the archive from U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, filed August 7, 2024.
See also: Benworth Oto — the same docket (docket No. 3:24-cv-04840) under another case page, 100 public filings; 1 of the documents appear on both pages.
This listing is consolidated at Benworth Oto — the full docket page for this case, with all 101 filings in the archive.
Case facts
| Caption | Benworth Capital Partners, LLC v. Oto Analytics, LLC |
|---|---|
| Court | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California |
| Docket number | 3:24-cv-04840 |
| Filings | 2 public filings |
| Filed | 2024-08-07 |
| Document types | motion (1) |
| Original PDFs | 1 of 2 |
Case summary
Benworth Capital Partners, LLC filed a Notice of Petition and Petition to Vacate Final Arbitration Award on August 7, 2024 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Francisco Division, No. 3:24-cv-04840-AMO, against Oto Analytics, LLC f/k/a Oto Analytics, Inc. d/b/a Womply. The petition asks the court, under section 10 of the Federal Arbitration Act, to vacate the corrected final award issued by Arbitrator Alexander Brainerd on June 26, 2024, which incorporated an interim award of December 21, 2023 and ordered Benworth to pay Womply a principal amount of $86,299,892, pre-award interest totalling $25,363,697.68, and attorneys' fees and costs totalling $6,256,665.04. The page holds two filings, both dated August 7, 2024: the redacted petition and an administrative motion to seal.
Case at a glance
| Parties | Petitioner Benworth Capital Partners, LLC, represented by Kozyak Tropin & Throckmorton and Girard Sharp LLP; respondent Oto Analytics, LLC f/k/a Oto Analytics, Inc. d/b/a Womply |
|---|---|
| Court and docket | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Francisco Division, No. 3:24-cv-04840-AMO. Petition Document 1, administrative motion Document 3. The petition states that Benworth marked the action as related to Oto Analytics, LLC f/k/a Oto Analytics, Inc. d/b/a Womply v. Benworth Capital Partners, LLC, No. 3:24-cv-03975-AMO, under Local Rule 3-12 |
| Program | Paycheck Protection Program. The petition states that the case arises out of the PPP administered by the SBA, and that Womply developed a technology platform known as Fast Lane for PPP applications |
| Claims | Vacatur of the final award on three grounds stated in the petition: that the arbitrator exceeded his powers under 9 U.S.C. § 10(a)(4); that the award is unenforceable because it compels Benworth to violate federal law; and that the arbitrator was guilty of misconduct in refusing to postpone the proceedings under 9 U.S.C. § 10(a)(3). These are the petitioner's contentions |
| Disposition or status | Not readable from the filings on this page. Both documents are dated August 7, 2024 and no order, opinion or ruling on the petition is published under this route |
What was the arbitration about?
According to the petition, Womply initiated the arbitration on August 25, 2021, asserting three causes of action for breach of contract: failure to pay referral fees, failure to pay API fees, and failure to pay technology fees. The petition states that Womply sought more than $200 million in additional compensation from Benworth, together with compound pre-judgment interest at 1.5 per cent per month and an award of attorneys' fees and costs, and that Benworth answered with affirmative defences and counterclaims.
What does the petition say about the fees already paid?
That by the conclusion of the PPP Benworth had funded approximately 305,000 Womply-referred loans, had received approximately $680 million in lender processing fees from the SBA to fund and service them, and had paid Womply $464,991,487 of that sum, which the petition puts at 68.3 per cent of the fees the SBA paid Benworth.
What is filed under seal?
The petition is marked REDACTED and FILED UNDER SEAL. The administrative motion states that Benworth provisionally submits material under seal to comply with Civil Local Rules 7-11 and 79-5, the stipulated protective order entered in the arbitration and JAMS Rule 26(a), and that Womply bears the burden of justifying its confidentiality claims.
Summary written from the documents on this page; every sentence is sourced.
Filings
2 public filings from this case, in filing-date order.
Court, dates and docket numbers are as recorded on the filings.